AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[drummer]

Originally Posted by freerover

Early in Project Connect post 2014, they looked into expanding commuter rail to the airport via the existing Green Line track with what would have to be land purchases through Dog's Head down to the port.

They also looked into using the abanonded MOKAN corridor that Txdot owns but Txdot came back and said it has to be used for a highway due to the funds that were used to purchase the ROW from the old Rail Road.


TxDot is now asking the feds for funds to build an "autonomous vehicle" highway because all they know how to be is terrible.



Doing a commuter train on the existing rail ROW to Kyle, Buda, San Marcos etc would require a full dem takeover of the state executive which seems unlikely. There is a lot that we can't do until we can change TxDot directives. However, IF we had the full support of the state and Txdot then I think it would be much much much easier to work out a deal with Missouri Pacific. Like everything else, the road to progress goes through the state house. It's time we all accept that and figure out how to make it happen.

Yeah, I recall the discussion re: MoKan corridor and the mess that is sharing rail with larger operators. The only way I see commuter rail succeed is independent rail - which is pricey, to say the least.

Maybe someday.......

[OfficialPBreton]

Originally Posted by FrankLloydLeft

On an aside, what agency would be in charge of looking into building out commuter rail lines to towns like Lockhart, San Marcos, Bastrop, etc. Feels like providing those areas with an alt to driving could help curb any Metroplex-style sprawl. Really would love for SA and Austin not to blur any further into each other.

CAMPO (Planning) and either TxDOT or local agencies / jurisdictions.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by drummer

Yeah, I recall the discussion re: MoKan corridor and the mess that is sharing rail with larger operators. The only way I see commuter rail succeed is independent rail - which is pricey, to say the least.

Maybe someday.......

This applies to many policy areas urbanists care about, and moreso for Austin, San Antonio, and El Paso than Houston, Dallas, or Fort Worth.

• rail and other public transit;
• bike infrastructure;
• pedestrian infrastructure;
• zoning/land use reform;
• ride-share reform;
• highway redesign reform…

…the list goes on and on.

[H2O]

Originally Posted by FrankLloydLeft

On an aside, what agency would be in charge of looking into building out commuter rail lines to towns like Lockhart, San Marcos, Bastrop, etc. Feels like providing those areas with an alt to driving could help curb any Metroplex-style sprawl. Really would love for SA and Austin not to blur any further into each other.

That is CARTS (Capital Area Rural Transportation System) jurisdiction. They mostly run on demand services, but with additional funding they could operate more regular route commuter bus service. They recently opened a new terminal in conjunction with Cap Metro on East Cesar Chavez.

I wouldn't count on rail anywhere it doesn't already exist though. And not likely on any rail owned by Union Pacific or TxDOT. MOKAN ROW could be rail, but the tracks are gone or unserviceable and some of the ROW is now trails and/or streets. I could see rail being built along US 79 / UP out to Round Rock, Hutto and Taylor. The ROWs are adjacent and wide enough it probably wouldn't be difficult to squeeze new commuter rail tracks between them without interfering with either the highway or freight rail. I would expect in that case that it would be operated by Cap Metro since they have the expertise / capacity to operate rail.

That pretty much leaves just the Red and Green Lines and possible extensions of them to places like Elgin and Liberty Hill.

[ATX2030]

Austin’s Project Connect clears state opposition… for now

by: Grace Reader
Posted: May 30, 2023 / 04:27 PM CDT
Updated: May 30, 2023 / 04:27 PM CDT

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/aust...ition-for-now/

[FrankLloydLeft]

Originally Posted by H2O

That is CARTS (Capital Area Rural Transportation System) jurisdiction. They mostly run on demand services, but with additional funding they could operate more regular route commuter bus service. They recently opened a new terminal in conjunction with Cap Metro on East Cesar Chavez.

I wouldn't count on rail anywhere it doesn't already exist though. And not likely on any rail owned by Union Pacific or TxDOT. .

Thanks y'all!

So basically either we turn Texas blue and hope we see TXDOT ran by people who understand the T at the end stands for more than cars, or hope one of the freight rail companies dip their toes into passenger services.

In any case, it's wild to think we're spending this half of the century trying to get back a fraction of the connectivity they had during the beginning of the 20th.

[ATX2030]

Austin's light-rail plans set to advance after narrowly dodging Texas-sized wrecking ball

KUT 90.5 | By Nathan Bernier
Published May 31, 2023 at 6:02 AM CDT

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2...-wrecking-ball

[ATX2030]

Austin City Council to vote on Project Connect rail line proposal Thursday

by: Grace Reader

Posted: Jun 1, 2023 / 06:30 AM CDT
Updated: Jun 1, 2023 / 09:37 AM CDT

Airport settlement update as well....

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/aust...osal-thursday/

[lonewolf]

really hope this doesn't get through. this does not even remotely resemble what we voted for.

i am not in the "any progress is good progress" camp. this system will not get used and will have to be completely redone in 20 years.

[freerover]

delete

[We vs us]

Originally Posted by lonewolf

really hope this doesn't get through. this does not even remotely resemble what we voted for.

i am not in the "any progress is good progress" camp. this system will not get used and will have to be completely redone in 20 years.

Gotta say, that's almost certainly not the case. They've made the hard decision to build the thing out more piecemeal than we'd hoped, but this first piece is the spine of the whole system. It's placed to get the most usage possible, given the resource constraints.

I don't like it either, but it's also not the end of the world. We've just got to take a step further back than we wanted.

[ATX2030]

Just start something already. If it's successful, expansion will come.

[Lobotomizer]

You have to start somewhere. This is not a bad starter line. Austinites voted for a substantial property tax increase in perpetuity specifically to build rail transit. This is the beginning of a system which will continue to grow and expand for generations of Austinites. Let's do this!

[drummer]

I feel similarly - start something and folks will see the tangible benefit, even if it's not ideal. One thing I've learned (despite my idealistic tendencies) is that ideal NEVER happens. We do well to get as close as feasibly possible, but this is better than the current solution.

[papertowelroll]

Originally Posted by lonewolf

really hope this doesn't get through. this does not even remotely resemble what we voted for.

i am not in the "any progress is good progress" camp. this system will not get used and will have to be completely redone in 20 years.

Strong disagree.

This is a great starter line and frankly the price tag for it really isn't that bad. If I hadn't seen the fantasy that was floated previously I would have been excited about this plan. I'll agree that the communication strategy that they used was a bit questionable.

[Maximusx1]

Agree that this is the backbone of a future system and I want to get this thing off the ground. I know things can't be perfect, and I'll continue to hope that an expansion to Triangle and Crestview is almost immediate.

[urbancore]

The cost is too high and serves too few. I can’t take anyone seriously who won’t say where they draw the line, either $/per rider, or $/% of total cars removed from the road.

Is there not a price that we should say, “hey, wait a minute.”?
Im sure if I ordered Google fiber and got 1/3 speed for full speed prices, I’d be upset. This is no different, other than, idealists don’t mind spending taxpayers money and/or holding politicians/bureaucrats accountable.

Taxes are paid by all of us to serve a few thousand riders.

If we had density like (10-15k, instead of 2-3k), I would understand. But we will NEVER have the density of even Portland (4k), our code will never allow it.

Just raise more taxes, it’s fine, we’ll just make more money……

[ohhey]

The money would be better spent completely redesigning and expanding the bus system. The train won't really work without a good bus system to get people to/from the 90+ percent of the city not served by rail. Get the bus system right first, and rail becomes a much better value proposition... Increase bus frequency, upgrade equipment, improve bus stops, add more park and ride locations, create more dedicated bus lanes, etc. I know some of this is being planned, but it's clearly not the top priority.

[Lobotomizer]

Originally Posted by urbancore

The cost is too high and serves too few. I can’t take anyone seriously who won’t say where they draw the line, either $/per rider, or $/% of total cars removed from the road.

Is there not a price that we should say, “hey, wait a minute.”?
Im sure if I ordered Google fiber and got 1/3 speed for full speed prices, I’d be upset. This is no different, other than, idealists don’t mind spending taxpayers money and/or holding politicians/bureaucrats accountable.

Taxes are paid by all of us to serve a few thousand riders.

If we had density like (10-15k, instead of 2-3k), I would understand. But we will NEVER have the density of even Portland (4k), our code will never allow it.

Just raise more taxes, it’s fine, we’ll just make more money……

It is difficult to take you seriously when you post info regarding density which is misleading.

The city of Austin has a density of over 3,000 ppsm now, and is indeed getting more dense. 4,000 ppsm is very attainable.

However, that is the average density across the city which sprawls across 3 counties, and covers 320 square miles.
Making a conclusion based off of the citywide average density is pretty meaningless. People in Shady Hollow or Avery Ranch are living quite a different lifestyle than someone near Plaza Saltillo or West Campus.

It would be similar to drawing a conclusion regarding Texas having a population density of 114 ppsm. It does not give you much of an idea of how most Texans live, as about 20 million of us live in the 4 major metros. That's 66% of the state's population living in less than 10% of it's area.

Austin has the densest census tracts in the state, and some of the densest in the country outside of the major coastal cities. This city punches waaaay above it's weight when it comes to density, and the fact it doesn't get more credit for that fact even on SSP where you'd think people would be more informed is a little baffling.

There are a lot of census tracts exceeding 10,000 ppsm, quite a few over 15,000 ppsm, and some exceeding 50,000 ppsm. Where are these located? Right along the rail lines that Project Connect is going to build. E. Riverside, downtown, West Campus, all of which just continue to increase their density year after year.

And none of that even mentions that Austin has a very high employment density in it's CBD and central core. Again, it punches waaay above it's weight in this metric as well. Most cities outside of the major coastal cities are much more decentralized.

And it's a place people want to visit. It has tons of events drawing people to it's core year round. This city is ripe for rail transit. It will be an overwhelming success.

[valhalla]

5 billion dollars for 10 miles of rail?? Can someone please explain to me how light rail can cost 500 million dollars per mile? I'm not being facetious, like I would honestly appreciate an explanation. I want to see light rail in austin more than anything but these numbers make it look like officials are skimming more off the top than a Zairian kleptocracy.